Appeal 2007-1293
Application 10/745,124
REJECTIONS AT ISSUE
Claims 1 through 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated
by Konopka. The Examiner’s rejection is set forth on page 3 of the Answer.
Claims 1 through 3, 9, and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
anticipated by Lieder. The Examiner’s rejection is set forth on page 4 of the
Answer.
Claims 4, and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Lieder in view of Nishibe. The Examiner’s rejection is set forth
on pages 4 and 5 of the Answer.
Claims 6 through 8, and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Lieder in view of Yanagihara. The Examiner’s rejection is set
forth on page 5 of the Answer.
Claims 6 through 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Konopka in view of Yanagihara. The Examiner’s rejection is set
forth on pages 5 and 6 of the Answer.
Throughout the opinion we make reference to the Brief and Reply Brief
(filed March 20, 2006, and August 8, 2006, respectively), and the Answer (mailed
June 8, 2006) for the respective details thereof.
2 We note that the final Office action included a rejection of claims 9 and 10 as
anticipated by Konopka. This rejection was not repeated in the Examiner’s
Answer. Accordingly, we consider the rejection to be withdrawn.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013